Just some food for thought. But, it is extremely odd that all of a sudden 50 women with similar stories are all suddenly coming forward and accusing Bill Cosby. It is interesting that some of these women have inconsistencies in their stories. Some of these women claim to have accepted money from him, let him pay their bills, voluntarily took pills that he "gave to them" and also none of these women (irrelevant if they were believed or not) went and had a rape test done to have some proof that they did take action at the time of the crimes. It is also very interesting that MANY people take offense to Bill Cosby (due to what he or what we thought he stood for). I am not going to downplay that rape is often brushed under the rug and never dealt with. However, wealthy people are often victims of lies and conspiracies, especially wealthy people that are outspoken. I am not taking sides, however because these women waited so long to suddenly speak up and because they took no action to have proof of what happened then I don't think even with a trial that I could ever truly say. It is entirely possible that someone seriously dislikes Cosby enough to have an agenda against him. To offer to pay women to be on it. It is not uncommon to try and crush someone's legacy.
I also find it hard to believe that a show that ran for a decade where Cosby had a busy life with his on screen family, that none of these people saw any suspicious behavior. If he truly was as promiscuous as they say.
If he truly did this, I pity those women. But I also criticize them. They should have spoke up, they should have made a stand, they should have gone to a hospital and had a rape test done and filed. Even if it wasn't believe then, if a string of women were to consistently do this and have actual proof. Then it would not be hard to bring this sort of thing down.
You should not fear not being believed when you have spoken up and taken a stand. You should fear not believed because you never made the effort to be believed.
My final comment is to those that think because in interviews he has been quoted as saying "I don't want to talk about that" if he indeed didn't do it, then I can see why he wouldn't want to talk about it. To have the image that he has had for so long and suddenly see it crumble. I would be offended and annoyed to hear the question. Also, it is disrespectful and in bad taste for journalism to use an interview for an art exhibit to get Hollywood gossip out of the accused, especially after having requested that it not be brought up.
If he is wrong, I hope justice is served. If he is not, he is owed an apology.
Interesting blog post that helps give perspective to both sides